“… one of the stated purposes of school integration was to bring black students up to a level close to that of white students. But, to the great disappointment of everyone, the results of this theory worked exactly in reverse of its intended purpose, and instead of black students rising to the educational levels previously attained by white students, the white students dropped to the level of black students. To make matters worse the lack of discipline and ambition of black students soon became shared by their white classmates, and our educational system has been in a steady decline ever since.”

Do any of you seriously believe that garbage?

Basically what Hubbard is saying is: "blacks students are lazy and stupid and because of integration, white students are lazy and stupid now as well and it's all the fault of the black students."

Hubbard is a racist anal opening of the first degree and anyone who claims that Hubbard is correct is a racist analysis opening as well.

Reality got you focusing on your anal area there chili? Keep your personal life just that personal. None of us want to know!

So, can I put you down as one of those who agrees with Hubbard's statement?

Do you really think that black students are lazy and stupid and that white students who associate with them are lazy and stupid as well?

Chilidawg wrote:Do you really think that black students are lazy and stupid and that white students who associate with them are lazy and stupid as well?

If we divide the U.S. up into 4 groups, one of them has to be the laziest and stupidest group and one has to be the most motivated and intelligent. Through the events of history and not DNA, that is blacks and Asians in the U.S., respectively. Do you disagree with this or do you believe all groups on average are exactly the same and the impact of whatever (racism, slavery, Jim Crow, social welfare system, race hustlers, etc.) you chose have had no effect? You can't have it both ways.

BTW, if you spit out the whites in suburbia from the whites in Appalachia, you get basically the same differences and for the same reasons as you get between the average black and the average white. Now am I racists for holding that opinion?

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

“The average IQ of immigrants in the United States is substantially lower than that of the white native population, and the difference is likely to persist over several generations.”

“The consequences are a lack of socioeconomic assimilation among low-IQ immigrant groups, more underclass behavior, less social trust, and an increase in the proportion of unskilled workers in the American labor market,” he writes. “Selecting high-IQ immigrants would ameliorate these problems in the U.S., while at the same time benefiting smart potential immigrants who lack educational access in their home countries.”

No one knows whether Hispanics will ever reach IQ parity with whites, but the prediction that new Hispanic immigrants will have low-IQ children and grandchildren is difficult to argue against.

I'm willing to bet that the odds are greater than Assa's 50/50 that most of you will fail to see the logical flaws and inherent bigotry in that statement.

So based on the things that you have chosen to quote, are you even certain that you are in fundamental disagreement with the things that you have quoted? Not talking about poor choice of wording on a sensitive subject.

That is unless you are saying that the impacts of socio-economic factors, the poverty cycle, and environmental factors on all racial groups are basically the same.

You are not, are you?

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.

So based on the things that you have chosen to quote, are you even certain that you are in fundamental disagreement with the things that you have quoted? Not talking about poor choice of wording on a sensitive subject.

That is unless you are saying that the impacts of socio-economic factors, the poverty cycle, and environmental factors on all racial groups are basically the same.

You are not, are you?

You are being deliberately obtuse.

You don't think that over 150 years of institutionalized descrimination has not had a profound effect?

Seriously?

Are you arguing that Hubbard's statements are not fundamentally flawed?

So based on the things that you have chosen to quote, are you even certain that you are in fundamental disagreement with the things that you have quoted? Not talking about poor choice of wording on a sensitive subject.

That is unless you are saying that the impacts of socio-economic factors, the poverty cycle, and environmental factors on all racial groups are basically the same.

You are not, are you?

You are being deliberately obtuse.

You don't think that over 150 years of institutionalized descrimination has not had a profound effect?

Seriously?

Are you arguing that Hubbard's statements are not fundamentally flawed?

Flawed or not, you have presented nothing that makes them fundamentally racism which is the case you failed to make. You may be correct, but you have presented nothing that supports your premise. Evil people often use very clever and deceptive means to achieve their ends by making mostly true or it would be nice if it were true statements to deceive people and that is why I believe things are worse for minorities at this point.

You are playing right into the hands of the race hustlers because unless you make the PC arguments about the current state of affairs, you will be condemned as a racists (or an Uncle Tom, oreo, etc. if you are a minority) so just shut up and let the minorities rot on the Democrat/race hustler plantation. When the Democrats controlled the south we had slavery, segregation and Jim Crow. When those truly racist institutions could not withstand common decency, the Democrats have found another way to keep the black man down and now they give them their overwhelming loyalty and devotion for it. Of course, now most think they are sincerely looking out for the well being (even though they are failing horribly) of the minorities and are just the modern incarnation of the same old control freaks trying to control everything and doing horrible things to people's lives as a result of their incompetence, arrogance, and faux-compassion.

However, if you want to apply basic Darwinian logic, of the subset of the population captured and sent into slavery, would they have been disproportionately the best and brightest of the population?

If you want to debate that fine, it is irrelevant. BTW, what point would it serve if you had to concede that the descendant of slaves on average had significantly lower IQ, motivation, etc.? NOTHING if we treat all individuals equally because even if true there is the entire spectrum of individuals from Einstein to my dog.

A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.